THE BRIDGE TABLE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 20112, 24 November 1928, Page 5 (Supplement)

THE BRIDGE TABLE.

INITIAL BIDS OF TWO.

BY MAJOR TENACE.

Having started last week to discuss disputed bids at auction I am tempted to persist by a passage in Mr. Wilbur C. Whitehead's " Complete Auction Bridge," to whirl) is attached a footnote. Tho passage refers to the initial bid of two which lias been a subject of endless controversy ever since bidding was introduced into bridge. At one time, tho bid bore different meanings according to suit m which it was made; but this convention was killed by its own clumsiness and intricacy. At another time tho initial bid of two proclaimed a long suit without top honours, but it was soon found that a bid with this holding tended to shut out partner, whilo putting no obstacle in tho way of the opponents, and with the establishment of tho two quick tricks requirement for an initial bid, tho bidding of hands of this sort was naturally relegated to tho second round. For some time after this, tlio bid was left in abeyance. To-day, if it is made in England, it usually indicates that the players have been too long at tho table and are trying to stimulate their flagging powers by indulging in a gamble. But in America there has been an attempt within the past few years to revive the use of the initial bid of two on more commonsenso lines. If a player with the initial bid calls two, the natural inference is that ho holds more than tho normal requirements for a bid of one. and less than the minimum for a pre-emptive bid. An Exact Interpretation. Tho convention sought to bo established is in accordance with this natural inference, but it goes much further and attempts to fix the significance of tho bid with a great degreo of exactness. The initial bid of two, according to tho latest theory—and its exponents are among the highest authorities in America —shows precisely six cards headed by the ace king, queen, and no sido strength worth talking abbut. This is the convention stated by Mr. Milton Work. Mr. Whitehead, dealing with the subject in tho passago which provoked this article, says:—"lf made, an original suit bid of two, whether in a major or a minor suit, should invariably indicate a holding of precisely six cards headed by A K Q, or A K Q J, and, consequently, the justifiable expectancy of six tricks whether played at trumps or no-trumps." In a footnote, however, Mr. Whitehead remarks:—"The author personally never makes an original two-bid, but agrees with his colleague, Mr. Worl«, that if made a two-bid should have this specific meaning." He gives no reason far his refusal to adopt tho initial bid of two. and this is a pity, for Mr. Work's justification for it is very full and amply illustrated. Ho argues that tho exactness of the information conveyed is of great value to partner, enabling him to support on side strength alone though he holds less than the normal expectancy in trumps, and to take out to no-trumps with only a single guard in the adverse suit. Too Many Conventions. All this may bo admitted, bttt it is not quito to tho point. Auction is already dangerously* loaded with conventions, and he who seeks to establish a new one must prove not morely that its object is sound, but that it cannot bo achieved in any other way with at least equal success. In short, Mr. Work must prove, not merely the value of showing six cards headed by the ace, king, kpieen, but that by using tho initial bid of two for tho purpose he gives a definite advantage over Mr. Whitehead, who would, doubtless, achieve the same end by bidding initially and rebidding on tho second round, whether partner supported him or not Mr. Work realises this well tinough, and his examples are all selected with the object of proving this advantage They have one feature in common, a pre-omptive bid by second hand which would prevent the intial bidder from rebidding and shut out his partner unless he knew tho exact basis of tiie initial bid. But hands which warrant a pre-emptive initial bid are rare enough, and tho circumstances which war- ! rant a pre-emptiVe bid after the opponent on the right has shown his strength are uot easily imagined. To conclude, then, I would say that if the initial bid of two is used, it should bear the interpretation put upon it by Mr. Work, but in actual practice, tho convention is of little use and not worth the trouble to establish in tho English game. It is an example of over-refine-ment typical of a good deal of recent American theory. The Game-going Combination.

From timo to time I receive deals with requests for information as to how the hands should havo been bid. The actual bidding fails to reveal tho game-going combination, and either the opponents were left in to make a partial score or tho game-going hands were played at the wrong suit. I ha ye been examining a number of such deals recently and I have found that in nearly every case, tho concealment of tho game-going combination was due either to the neglect of a fourcard major suit or to the bid of notrumps in preference to a fivo-card major suit. Here are two special instances (Z is tho dealer in each): —

In tho first deal Y and Z can go gamo at spades, but unless Z bids the suit initially it will not bo shown and the hands will be played either al diamonds or against hearts In tho second deal Y and Z havo a gamt at hearts but if Z bids 0110 no trump the others will pass and A and U will Do able to hold their opponents dowi, to eight tricks. No system ol bidding is perfect; and, no doubt, deals will oecui in which gamo will be missed becauso two partners fail to reveal tho game going bid between thenhands ; but if players bid with tho object of telling their partners as much as they can about the strength of their hands, such failures will bo rare and negligible.